Continuation of Public Hearing on Proposed Changes to RegulationsRegarding Allowable Maintenance During New Vehicle Certificationof Light-Duty and Medium-Duty Vehicles.

RECOMMENDATION

Adopt Resolution 77-16.

SUMMARY

The views expressed by the automobile manufacturers who respondedto a staff questionnaire and participated in workshops with thestaff indicate that it is technologically feasible to buildvehicles requiring far less frequent emissions relatedmaintenance than is allowed under current regulations. Information submitted by the manufacturers leads the staff toconclude that with the exception of air filter and oxygen sensorreplacements at 30,000 miles, no other emissions-relatedmaintenance is necessary during the first 50,000 miles of vehicleoperation. For certain maintenance items, however, somemanufacturers strongly object to having their allowablemaintenance limited to the extent that other manufacturers claimis technologically feasible.

With respect to the manufacturers' legal objections, the staffbelieves that the Board clearly has the legal authority to adoptthe proposed maintenance regulations. The manufacturers appearto have conceded that the Board has the authority to limitallowable maintenance during the certification process.

The Board should authorize the Executive Officer to conduct apublic hearing regarding proposed technical changes to Title 13,California Administrative Code, needed to clarify the Board'stest procedures.

SUMMARY

The ARB staff is proposing a number of technical changes to thetest procedures for 1979 and later model-year light and medium-duty vehicles, which were last amended by the Board at itsNovember 23, 1976 meeting. First, the staff proposes to correctthe 0.41 gm/mi non-methane hydrocarbon standard for light-dutyvehicles to 0.39 gm/mi for 1980 and subsequent model-year carsand light-duty trucks. The staff also proposes replacing thepresent high altitude test requirements for emission controlsystems with language which clarifies those requirements andnarrows their scope. Third, the staff believes that the medium-duty vehicle selection procedure should be modified beginningwith the 1979 model year to make it consistent with the EPAprocedure which will take effect that year. Fourth, the staffsuggests that language be added to the evaporative emission testprocedure which clarifies the fact that the interpolated 4,000and 50,000-mile points must be within the evaporative emissionstandards and that these points should also be used to determinethe deterioration factor. Last, it is proposed that ARB testprocedures be updated for consistency with EPA procedures formodel year 1979 and for each subsequent model year. Previous ARBpractice has been to handle minor procedural changesadministratively to maintain consistency with EPA.

ITEM NO.: 77-12-3

Status Report on the California Program for Gasoline VaporRecovery During Gasoline Marketing Operations.

RECOMMENDATION

None. This is an informational report.

SUMMARY

A program to recover gasoline vapors during gasoline marketingoperations began in California in 1973. The purposes of theprogram are to reduce hydrocarbon emissions that are by-productsof the evaporation of gasoline and to recover gasoline that wouldotherwise be lost through evaporation. Estimates indicate that avapor recovery program in California, when fully implemented,will prevent the emission of 222 tons of hydrocarbons per day andsave as much as 26 million gallons of gasoline per year.

The program is based on gasoline vapor recovery rules that weredeveloped by the Environmental Protection Agency, the AirResources Board, and individual air pollution control districts. These rules set guidelines for the effectiveness of recoverysystems and say where -- in terms of marketing facilities andgeographic location -- gasoline vapors are to be recovered. Asof today, EPA gasoline vapor recovery rules are required in allair pollution control districts of these air basins:

In addition, the Bay Area and San Diego Air Pollution ControlDistricts had adopted their own gasoline vapor recovery rulesprior to federal and state action. The Air Resources Board staffis studying the feasibility of extending some vapor recoveryrequirements into the Mountain Counties and Lake Tahoe Air Basinsand the rural areas of the Sacramento and San Joaquin Valley AirBasins.

Two basic systems -- the balance system and the vacuum-assistedsystem -- are used to recover gasoline vapors. In the balancesystem, liquid coming into the vehicle fuel tank creates apressure that forces vapors through a return line back to theunderground storage tank. In the vacuum-assisted system, anaspirator, pump, or blower draws the vapors through the returnline. Gasoline service stations have been using one or the otherof these systems, but so far bulk plants and most of theterminals have been using only the balance system.

As part of the vapor recovery program, certification and testprocedures have been developed to ensure that gasoline vaporrecovery systems meet prescribed standards of efficiency; arereasonably safe, with respect to fire and industrial hazards; andare compatible with the vehicles with the systems are to be used. The performance standard for vapor recovery systems at each fueltransfer operation specifies that 90 percent by weight of thevapors displaced during transfer operations be prevented frombeing released into the atmosphere. Four systems for use in thefilling of underground storage tanks have been certified; testsare now in progress on systems that can be used in fuelingvehicles, but to date no systems have been certified. However,at least one system (a vacuum assisted system) has completed allaspects of the certification requirements, except for the Statefire Marshal's approval, which is expected shortly.

The recent performance of aspirated assisted and vacuum assistedsystems is leading the staff to consider a more stringent stageII vapor recovery standard for new system installations, at leastfor those areas of California where violations of the ambient airquality standard for oxidant are severe. The latest systemperformance and cost data on systems like the Hasselmann vacuumassisted appear to support a tightening of the standard. Previous concerns that vacuum assisted systems would provide onlyminimally higher collection efficiency at substantially highercosts have been allayed. Based on the latest data from systemmanufacturers, the staff believes vacuum assisted stage IIsystems are now available which cost only $600 more than typicalbalance systems when installed at existing service stations.

Problems associated with the vapor recovery program in Californiahave generally centered around vehicle fueling operations atservice stations. These problems have involved mismatchesbetween vehicle gas tank fill pipes and vapor recovery nozzlesthat are heavier and bulkier than other nozzles; and designcharacteristics that have allowed blow-back of gasoline; over-fueling, spillage, or in rare instances, fire. Efforts by theAir Resources Board staff, the State Fire Marshal, the Divisionof Measurement Standards, and the designers of vapor recoverysystems will serve to eliminate all of the serious problems andhazards associated with gasoline vapor recovery. Several of thesystems now undergoing the certification process aresubstantially improved over typical systems currently in use.